Thread: RSPS extensibility & plugins

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39
  1. #21  
    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,253
    Thanks given
    1,145
    Thanks received
    909
    Rep Power
    2081
    Quote Originally Posted by JayArrowz View Post
    When you start trying to render depth, fog etc on the 317 client you can see quite a big performance hit unless you have a powerful single core. This is the main reason why i didn't want to stay on the 317 rev with new data. Instead switching revisions allows you to use a more updated client with better rendering capabilities.
    presumably that's due to poor implementation and not utilising proper gpu rendering ? not sure I've not seen how they've been implemented on 317
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Programmer, Contributor, RM and Veteran




    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,147
    Thanks given
    2,656
    Thanks received
    3,731
    Rep Power
    5000
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    presumably that's due to poor implementation and not utilising proper gpu rendering ? not sure I've not seen how they've been implemented on 317
    Yeah, it'll be because of the software renderer (I wouldn't necessarily say poor implementation, it's just that CPUs aren't best suited for the task).
    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,253
    Thanks given
    1,145
    Thanks received
    909
    Rep Power
    2081
    Quote Originally Posted by Graham View Post
    Yeah, it'll be because of the software renderer (I wouldn't necessarily say poor implementation, it's just that CPUs aren't best suited for the task).
    do you know if jfx is advanced enough for rendering of this kind yet ? looks like it should be - I have a lot of work to do in this respect, I was thinking of migrating the old swing / awt codebase over. My issue with using 500+ is the only thing I actually like is some of the HD (not even all of it), I like the simple 'medieval' feel of the early game, but not against some aspects of it like the textures / water lighting etc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Programmer, Contributor, RM and Veteran




    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,147
    Thanks given
    2,656
    Thanks received
    3,731
    Rep Power
    5000
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    do you know if jfx is advanced enough for rendering of this kind yet ? looks like it should be - I have a lot of work to do in this respect, I was thinking of migrating the old swing / awt codebase over. My issue with using 500+ is the only thing I actually like is some of the HD (not even all of it), I like the 'medieval' feel of the early game, but not against some aspects of it like the textures / water lighting etc
    The (original) client barely uses AWT anyway tbh (and no Swing at all!). It actually has its own 2d rasterizer backed by an int array. It only really uses AWT to copy those pixels to the screen once per frame, and to render the loading bar very early on before its own rasterizer is ready.

    I assume JavaFX will have some high performance mechanism to copy a bunch of pixels held in an int array to the screen, but I'm not familiar with it, so I don't know what it is.

    Presumably there's also way to get OpenGL working with JavaFX as well, but you might still need an AWT component somewhere (as the only way I'm aware of to get a native window handle in Java, which you need to actually set up an OpenGL context, is via JAWT).
    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. Thankful user:


  6. #25  
    Renown Programmer
    Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,179
    Thanks given
    260
    Thanks received
    1,012
    Rep Power
    2003
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    I don't see the performance issue with modern hardware tbh.
    On fury if you have full screen with depth buffer and anti aliasing enabled, doesn't matter if your running a top end cpu you won't break 30fps, and that's not because it's badly optimised, a cpu is just slow compared to gpu for rendering.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    Jaggrab can be deprecated or replaced (and do we even need it? the update server made sense when download speeds were dial up and these days you can bundle the cache easily enough with an msi).
    Yea even if you ignore the benefit on not making all of you players redownload 99% of the same data every cache change (who cares about the players right?), your server cache could go out of sync with the downloaded cache causing all kind of weird client experiences e.g maps not matching up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    I'll rip any genuine improvements.
    And that's exactly my point, doesn't matter who you are, rebuilding or riping from a high rev client will take longer and most likely be worse, why bother?
    Attached imageAttached image
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #26  
    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,253
    Thanks given
    1,145
    Thanks received
    909
    Rep Power
    2081
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg View Post
    On fury if you have full screen with depth buffer and anti aliasing enabled, doesn't matter if your running a top end cpu you won't break 30fps, and that's not because it's badly optimised, a cpu is just slow compared to gpu for rendering.



    Yea even if you ignore the benefit on not making all of you players redownload 99% of the same data every cache change (who cares about the players right?), your server cache could go out of sync with the downloaded cache causing all kind of weird client experiences e.g maps not matching up.



    And that's exactly my point, doesn't matter who you are, rebuilding or riping from a high rev client will take longer and most likely be worse, why bother?
    so add gpu rendering ? it's not worth me stripping a high rev of things I don't want either.

    as for the update server:

    1. it's a little extreme to say downloading a tiny cache folder (on older clients it's less than 100mb) is not caring about players in this day and age it's simply acknowledging the fact that connections are far faster.

    2. you shouldn't get any sync issues if you verify and have a proper distribution system.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #27  
    Programmer, Contributor, RM and Veteran




    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,147
    Thanks given
    2,656
    Thanks received
    3,731
    Rep Power
    5000
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    2. you shouldn't get any sync issues if you verify and have a proper distribution system.
    which already exists in both 317 and 5xx! no need to roll your own

    Admittedly 317's isn't as good, but it's perfectly functional. We have decent implementation of both (e.g. see Apollo for a 3xx implementation and ScapeEmu for a 5xx one).
    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. Thankful users:


  10. #28  
    Renown Programmer
    Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,179
    Thanks given
    260
    Thanks received
    1,012
    Rep Power
    2003
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    so add gpu rendering ? it's not worth me stripping a high rev of things I don't want either.

    as for the update server:

    1. it's a little extreme to say downloading a tiny cache folder (on older clients it's less than 100mb) is not caring about players in this day and age it's simply acknowledging the fact that connections are far faster.

    2. you shouldn't get any sync issues if you verify and have a proper distribution system.
    100 hours to learn and implement opengl into 317 vs 2 hours to learn and remove xteas. Hmm yes that's logically equivalent.
    Attached imageAttached image
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. Thankful user:


  12. #29  
    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,253
    Thanks given
    1,145
    Thanks received
    909
    Rep Power
    2081
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg View Post
    100 hours to learn and implement opengl into 317 vs 2 hours to learn and remove xteas. Hmm yes that's logicly equivilant.
    not when you exaggerate it like that it isn't...

    going through and removing every subtle detail that has changed that I don't want will far exceed 100 hr
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #30  
    Renown Programmer
    Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,179
    Thanks given
    260
    Thanks received
    1,012
    Rep Power
    2003
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Cape View Post
    not when you exaggerate it like that it isn't...
    Why don't you go ask the guys from SoulPlay or Empscape how long it took them? It doesn't matter if it was 50 or 500 hours it's won't be on the same scale as the number of hours it'd take to clean out a high rev client of a couple of things you dislike
    Attached imageAttached image
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)


User Tag List

Similar Threads

  1. RS Scripts | Wordpress Plugins for RSPS
    By TommoLadd in forum Website Development
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-06-2021, 05:21 AM
  2. RSPS Market - Websites - Forum themes - Plugins
    By apachenick in forum Selling
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-14-2019, 06:03 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-14-2016, 04:45 AM
  4. Replies: 46
    Last Post: 08-08-2014, 02:49 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-23-2014, 01:09 PM
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •